Lorentz Transform in Non-Minkowski Spaces

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the equivalent of the Lorentz Transform in non-Minkowski spaces, particularly focusing on how to perform coordinate transformations when the metric includes non-diagonal terms. The scope includes theoretical aspects of general relativity and the mathematical framework involving Killing vector fields.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant asks about the equivalent of the Lorentz Transform in non-Minkowski metrics and how to handle coordinate transformations with non-diagonal terms.
  • Another participant explains that Lorentz transformations are self-isometries of Minkowski spacetime and introduces the concept of Killing vector fields as a means to explore transformations in general Lorentzian spacetimes.
  • A participant suggests that to find transformations preserving the metric tensor in non-Minkowski spaces, one should use the Killing equations to identify Killing vectors.
  • Further discussion includes references to textbooks, specifically recommending Carroll's "Spacetime and Geometry" and mentioning the use of GRTensorII for computing Killing tensors.
  • One participant expresses difficulty with the mathematical background required for understanding the material, indicating a lack of experience with tensors.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

While there is agreement on the utility of Killing vectors in finding transformations in non-Minkowski spaces, the discussion reflects varying levels of understanding and comfort with the mathematical concepts involved. No consensus is reached on the best approach for those with limited mathematical backgrounds.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the importance of a solid mathematical foundation for studying general relativity, highlighting that the discussion may be limited by varying levels of mathematical expertise among participants.

Ateowa
Messages
25
Reaction score
0
What is the equivalent of the Lorentz Transform when the metric is not Minkowski? How do you do a coordinate transform with a metric that has non-diagonal terms?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
A Quick Overview of Killing Vector Fields

Hi, Ateowa and a belated welcome to PF,

The short answer is: "read in a good gtr textbook about Killing vector fields on a Lorentzian manifold".

A slightly longer answer:

The Lorentz transformations are self-isometries of Minkowski spacetime, that is, transformations which preserve "intervals" between all events, or IOW preserve the metric tensor. More precisely, the Lorentz group is a six-dimensional real Lie group which consists of all self-isometries which take the origin to itself; it is a subgroup of the ten-dimensional real Lie group of all self-isometries of Minkowski spacetime, which is called the Poincare group. The Lie algebra of a Lie group is a kind of "linearization" of the group in which elements of the group are replaced by vector fields on our manifold (which, it turns out, can be thought of as first order linear partial differential operators on the manifold). The Lie algebra of the Poincare group is generated by ten vector fields: three rotations, three boosts, three spatial translations, and one time translation 3+3+3+1=10.

This is exactly analogous to saying that the (six-dimensional) euclidean group is the group of all self-isometries of three-dimensional euclidean space, and the (three-dimensional) rotation group is the subgroup consisting of all self-isometries taking the origin to itself. The Lie algebra of the euclidean group is generated by six vector fields: three rotations and three translations.

This suggests that the analogue of the Poincare group for a general Lorentzian spacetime M should be the Lie group of all self-isometries on M. The Lie algebra of this group is generated by vector fields called Killing vector fields, and they are found by solving the Killing equations. (Killing was a student of Lie who did much to help develop Lie's ideas.)

It turns out that no spacetime has more independent Killing vectors (ten) than Minkowski spacetime, and most have far less or even none at all. The possible Lie algebras of Killing vectors have been enumerated and many theorems are known to the effect that no solution of the EFE has such and such symmetry with a finite number of known exceptional cases. I can give arbitrarly many specific examples of solutions of the Einstein field equation illustrating the various possible symmetry groups (equivalently, Lie algebras of Killing vectors), but perhaps it would be easier to refer interested PF readers to the monograph by Stephani et al, Exact Solutions of Einstein's Field Equations, Cambridge University Press, 2nd edition.
 
Last edited:
So to find a transformation that preserves the metric tensor in a space that is not Minkowski, I use the Killing equations to find Killing vectors?

I'll definitely take a look at Killing vectors in a gtr book. Thanks!
 
Ateowa said:
So to find a transformation that preserves the metric tensor in a space that is not Minkowski, I use the Killing equations to find Killing vectors?

Yes, exactly!

Ateowa said:
I'll definitely take a look at Killing vectors in a gtr book.

A good textbook from which to learn about this is Carroll, Spacetime and Geometry. If you use Maple, check out GRTensorII from a team led by Kayll Lake (Physics, Queens University, Kingston, Ontario). Using GRTensorII, it is very easy to compute the Killing tensor and then using Maple's casesplit command (basically, differential ring Groebner basis type magic) these can be solved to yield the Killing equations.
 
Carroll's book Spacetime and Geometry is actually what I'm using. It's tough though, because I don't have a very good mathematical background. I've never worked with tensors before this, so I quickly get lost, as Carroll mostly takes tensor manipulation for granted.
 
Hmmm... well, a good mathematical background is highly desirable preparation for many activities, including studying gtr, so I doubt I can offer helpful advice there other than to try to fill in the holes now that you have, I guess, strong motivation to do so! :wink:
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 101 ·
4
Replies
101
Views
7K
  • · Replies 54 ·
2
Replies
54
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K